(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, praying to call for the entire records pertaining to the final report in CC.51/2023 on the file of the Honble Court of Judicial Magistrate Avinashi and Quash the same.)

1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the entire records pertaining to the final report in CC.51 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Avinashi and quash the same.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent is residing with her family at G.N. Garden, Pasumai Nagar, Vallipuram, Perumanallur, Tiruppur. In her locality, there is a temple known as Sri Ramalingam Sowdeswari Amman Temple, and the house of the petitioners is situated near the said temple. It is alleged that the first petitioner used to abuse the second respondent by using unparliamentary words. On 30.01.2022 at about 08.15 a.m., the second respondent, along with others, went to the aforesaid temple, where the petitioners and the third and fourth accused allegedly abused them by using unparliamentary words. Thereafter, the second respondent informed her husband over the phone. When her husband came to the place of occurrence and started videographing the incident, the first petitioner allegedly exposed his underwear, asked him to record the same and behaved indecently. Since the parties were residing in the same locality, the second respondent did not initially take any action. However, as the first petitioner allegedly continued to indulge in similar acts whenever she visited the temple, she lodged a complaint before the first respondent on 09.12.2022. Based on the said complaint, an FIR in Crime No.501 of 2022 was registered against the petitioners and the other accused for the offences under Section 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. Upon completion of investigation, the impugned final report was filed on 20.12.2022, and the same was taken cognizance of by the learned Trial Court in C.C.No.51 of 2023.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the essential ingredients of the offences alleged against the petitioners have not been made out. It is contended that the second respondent is aggrieved by the petitioners' efforts to remove an alleged encroachment and is attempting to armtwist the petitioners by initiating the present criminal proceedings. It is further submitted that the petitioners have been arrayed as accused in the impugned final report in a mechanical and hasty manner, without proper application of mind or conducting a proper investigation. The first respondent conducted even a basic investigation prior to registering the FIR and filing the final report, it would have revealed that the petitioners had not committed any offence. It is also contended that the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences without proper application of mind. The learned counsel further submits that the settled proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court is that purely civil disputes ought not to be given a criminal colour and that criminal proceedings initiated with such an ulterior motive ought not to be entertained. According to the learned counsel, the said principle is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case and, therefore, the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.51 of 2023 are liable to be quashed.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners further submits that there is no independent public witness and that all the witnesses cited in the impugned final report are interested witnesses. Though the alleged occurrence is stated to have taken place in a public place, no independent member of the public has been cited as a witness. The learned counsel also submits that there are several judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court deprecating the tendency to initiate criminal proceedings against innocent persons with an ulterior motive of physically harassing and mentally humiliating them or for achieving an object which could not otherwise be achieved before a civil Court.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners reiterates that the petitioners have been implicated in the present case without any basis and without there being any material connecting them with the alleged offences, and that the complaint has been lodged with an ulterior motive. In any event, no prima facie case has been made out against the petitioners. Hence, he prayed for allowing the present Criminal Original Petition.

6. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

7. Though the alleged occurrence is stated to have taken place in a public place, there is no material to show that the alleged abusive words uttered by the accused caused any annoyance to the defacto complainant or to any other person. There is also no material to show that the alleged occurrence was witnessed by any independent member of the public. The FIR statement as well as the final report do not disclose any sufficient materials to establish a prima facie case against the petitioners.

8. The defacto complainant has stated about the words allegedly uttered by the accused. However, the witnesses have merely stated that the accused abused the defacto complainant and others in filthy language. In order to attract the offence under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, the prosecution is required to place sufficient materials to establish that the conduct attributed to the accused falls within the definition of "Harassment" under Section 2(a) of the said Act.

9. For attracting Section 4 of the said Act, the prosecution must prima facie establish that the accused committed, participated in, or abetted an act of harassment against a woman and that the alleged conduct falls within the statutory definition of "Harassment" under Section 2(a) of the Act. The alleged conduct must constitute an indecent act or conduct causing or likely to cause intimidation, fear, shame or embarrassment, including abuse, hurt, nuisance, assault or use of force.

10. Mere use of abusive or filthy language, by itself, would not automatically attract the offence under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, unless such conduct is shown to fall within the statutory definition of "Harassment" under Section 2(a) of the said Act.

11. In the present case, it is alleged by the defacto complainant that, at the time of occurrence, she informed her husband about the abuse allegedly committed by the accused, namely, Murugesan, Saraswathi, Mohanraj and Uma. Her husband thereafter came to the place of occurrence and videographed the incident. It is further alleged that, on seeing him videographing the occurrence, the petitioner/Mohanraj removed his dhoti and asked the husband of the defacto complainant to continue taking the video and behaved indecently. It is alleged that such conduct caused shame and embarrassment to the defacto complainant and her husband.

12. However, apart from the statements of the defacto complainant and the other witnesses, there are no independent materials to substantiate the said allegations or to establish that the conduct attributed to the petitioners constitutes "Harassment" within the meaning of Section 2(a) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. The materials collected during investigation, therefore, do not disclose the essential ingredients necessary to constitute the offences alleged against the petitioners.

13. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered view that the materials available on record do not disclose a prima facie case against the petitioners. Therefore, permitting the prosecution to continue would serve no useful purpose.

14. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the final report in C.C.No.51 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Avinashi, is hereby quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.